Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34413354›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Nearby contours abolish the binocular advantage.

Maria Lev, Jian Ding, Uri Polat, Dennis M Levi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Maria Lev *School of Optometry and Vision Science, The Mina & Everard Goodman Faculty of Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Jian Ding *School of Optometry and Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 94720-2020, USA.
Uri Polat *School of Optometry and Vision Science, The Mina & Everard Goodman Faculty of Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Dennis M Levi *School of Optometry and Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 94720-2020, USA. dlevi@berkeley.edu.

Funding

A New Approach to Restoring Visual Acuity and Stereopsis in Adults with AmblyopiaR01EY020976 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI BANKS, MARTIN S, BAVELIER, DAPHNE I · 2010 to 2020
$4.7M
Depth perception in normal and abnormal visionR01EY030544 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI DING, JIAN · 2020 to 2023
$1.4M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY020976NEI NIH HHS R01 EY030544
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

That binocular viewing confers an advantage over monocular viewing for detecting isolated low luminance or low contrast objects, has been known for well over a century; however, the processes involved in combining the images from the two eyes are still not fully understood. Importantly, in natural vision, objects are rarely isolated but appear in context. It is well known that nearby contours can either facilitate or suppress detection, depending on their distance from the target and the global configuration. Here we report that at close distances collinear (but not orthogonal) flanking contours suppress detection more under binocular compared to monocular viewing, thus completely abolishing the binocular advantage, both at threshold and suprathreshold levels. In contrast, more distant flankers facilitate both monocular and binocular detection, preserving a binocular advantage up to about four times the detection threshold. Our results for monocular and binocular viewing, for threshold contrast discrimination without nearby flankers, can be explained by a gain control model with uncertainty and internal multiplicative noise adding additional constraints on detection. However, in context with nearby flankers, both contrast detection threshold and suprathreshold contrast appearance matching require the addition of both target-to-target and flank-to-target interactions occurring before the site of binocular combination. To test an alternative model, in which the interactions occur after the site of binocular combination, we performed a dichoptic contrast matching experiment, with the target presented to one eye, and the flanks to the other eye. The two models make very different predictions for abutting flanks under dichoptic conditions. Interactions after the combination site predict that the perceived contrast of the flanked target will be strongly suppressed, while interactions before the site predict the perceived contrast will be more or less veridical. The data are consistent with the latter model, strongly suggesting that the interactions take place before the site of binocular combination.

Indexed as

Contrast SensitivityHumansModels, BiologicalSensory ThresholdsVision, Binocular

Identifiers

PMID34413354
PMCPMC8376993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.